BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Non functioning satellites

Expert replies
by chidcguy » Wed Jun 11, 2008 7:11 pm
Which of the following most logically completes the argument below?
Although the number of large artificial satellites orbiting the Earth is small compared to the number of small pieces of debris in orbit, the large satellites interfere more seriously with telescope observations because of the strong reflections they produce. Because many of those large satellites have ceased to function, the proposal has recently been made to eliminate interference from nonfunctioning satellites by exploding them in space.
This proposal, however, is ill conceived, since _______.

A. many nonfunctioning satellites remain in orbit for years
B. for satellites that have ceased to function, repairing them while they are in orbit would be prohibitively expensive
C. there are no known previous instances of satellites' having been exploded on purpose
D. the only way to make telescope observations without any interference from debris in orbit is to use telescopes launched into extremely high orbits around the Earth
E. a greatly increased number of small particles in Earth's orbit would result in a blanket of reflections that would make certain valuable telescope observations impossible
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by durgesh79 » Wed Jun 11, 2008 8:45 pm
we have to find out a statement that weakens the proposal that exploding satellites will improve the telescope observation.

Consider E - exploding large satellites will result in many small pieces, that will make certain telescopic observation impossible. clearly goes against exploding the satellites.

IMO E.
Join the discussion

by chidcguy » Wed Jun 11, 2008 8:55 pm
Same reasoning and same answer.

OA is D

what has exploding satellites got to do with the concept in D?

Also, it says only way. Which is another huge negative thing
Join the discussion

Re: Non functioning satellites

by durgesh79 » Thu Jun 12, 2008 1:33 am
:? Now if look it again, OA Makes sense. In the question the proposal is to "eliminate" interference. If it was to "reduce" then may be E was a better answer.
chidcguy wrote:the proposal has recently been made to eliminate interference from nonfunctioning satellites by exploding them in space.
This proposal, however, is ill conceived, since _______.
If D is true, we know the only way to do it is xxxx.......... means exploding satelliets will not eliminate it.
Join the discussion

by albertrahul » Thu Jun 12, 2008 7:23 am
Good Question, Thanks for posting.
I also went for E.

After knowing OA I read question more carefully.
Join the discussion

by shovan85 » Mon Sep 27, 2010 5:50 am
Its still E for me.

D does not suffice as it is clearly said the Debris do not cause that much problem but the satellites do because of reflection. If you do not explode them then they are still causing the same problem to the Telescopes irrespective of where the telescopes are placed. The premises clearly say that Satellites are causing problem to telescopic observations.

I am not at all convinced about D. Can any one help me on this?
Join the discussion

by ov25 » Mon Sep 27, 2010 9:09 am
imo D

logically completes-- we need to justify here

D: The only way.....to eliminate the interference (just what you need!)
Join the discussion

by g000fy » Mon Sep 27, 2010 9:23 am
ov25 wrote:imo D

logically completes-- we need to justify here

D: The only way.....to eliminate the interference (just what you need!)
Could you be more elaborate? The argument talks about eliminating intereference from non functioning satellites.
Join the discussion

by ov25 » Mon Sep 27, 2010 9:30 am
Could you be more elaborate? The argument talks about eliminating intereference from non functioning satellites.
The phrase "logically complete" means the answer has to support 100%.

The only way "take the telescopes high"... says there is no other way you could eliminate interference. This option is so strong that this method elminates all other proposals no matter what they are. including the one in the stimulus
Join the discussion

by paddle_sweep » Mon Sep 27, 2010 7:22 pm
Join the discussion

by vishalj » Mon Sep 27, 2010 8:34 pm
I concur with Paddle_Sweep. E is looking more appropriate. This is Fill In The Blank( Assumption) Question.
Join the discussion

by shovan85 » Mon Sep 27, 2010 10:12 pm
The source from where i solved this problem is the OLD SET of GMAT Questions. So I guess the answer is correct. The set says the answer is E.

However,
D says about Interference and Debris
E says about Explosion outcome and reflections

Why to concentrate on eliminating interference as the very first line of the passage says "Although the number of large artificial satellites orbiting the Earth is small compared to the number of small pieces of debris in orbit, the large satellites interfere more seriously with telescope observations because of the strong reflections they produce."



[/b]
Join the discussion

by diebeatsthegmat » Mon Sep 27, 2010 11:40 pm
chidcguy wrote:Which of the following most logically completes the argument below?
Although the number of large artificial satellites orbiting the Earth is small compared to the number of small pieces of debris in orbit, the large satellites interfere more seriously with telescope observations because of the strong reflections they produce. Because many of those large satellites have ceased to function, the proposal has recently been made to eliminate interference from nonfunctioning satellites by exploding them in space.
This proposal, however, is ill conceived, since _______.

A. many nonfunctioning satellites remain in orbit for years
B. for satellites that have ceased to function, repairing them while they are in orbit would be prohibitively expensive
C. there are no known previous instances of satellites' having been exploded on purpose
D. the only way to make telescope observations without any interference from debris in orbit is to use telescopes launched into extremely high orbits around the Earth
E. a greatly increased number of small particles in Earth's orbit would result in a blanket of reflections that would make certain valuable telescope observations impossible
the OA is E, if you say the OA is D, maybe you should review....
Join the discussion

by divyeshbatra » Sat Mar 14, 2015 11:44 pm
The OA is E.
Join the discussion